GREENWICH — Candidates for the Board of Education engaged in an at-times fiery debate Wednesday night over racial balance, the future of New Lebanon School, smaller class sizes, common core, charter change and a 10-year vision for Greenwich Public Schools.

Republicans Jason Auerbach, Peter Bernstein and Peter Sherr, who will battle for two seats on the school board in November, peppered their responses with verbal jabs at each others’ positions. Democrats Kathleen Stowe and Meghan Olsson are guaranteed seats on the Board of Education in November.

At the forum sponsored by the Byram and Chickahominy Neighborhood Associations and hosted at Hamilton Avenue School, education issues specific to western Greenwich were often a focus.

BOE hopefuls reiterated their stances on the New Lebanon School project and its place in the Greenwich Racial Balance Plan in two questions Wednesday.

The Republicans agreed that the state’s racial balance law, requiring the percentage of minority students at each individual school to fall within 25 percentage points of the district average, is bad policy. But they disagreed on the necessary size of a future New Lebanon School and how the town should proceed with a budget delays placing a question mark on state funding for the project.

“I think it is a travesty that Gov. (Dannel P.) Malloy has gone out of his way to say he won’t fund New Lebanon,” said Auerbach, a member of the RTM education committee seeking a BOE seat for the first time. He suggested that starting construction right away without the state grant — an expected 80 percent of the $37 million total price tag — in hand was the equivalent of a $23 million gamble.

“Two weeks ago at the Board of Ed meeting, one of my opponents stated that we just needed to move ahead,” Auerbach said. “Our children deserve a backup plan.”

Bernstein, a current board member who serves on the New Lebanon Building Committee, challenged the idea that Greenwich will have to pay the full cost of the school. The project has received all state approvals, he said.

“This isn’t an additional tax on people,” said Bernstein, who is seeking a second term. “This is money that we should be getting back (from the state).”

Stowe, an investment banker, agreed money for the New Lebanon project should be released by the town right away.

“It should be up to the standards for the rest of Greenwich,” she said. “We can build it. We’re Greenwich. It’s only going to become more expensive if we delay that.”

Both Auerbach and Sherr, the current board chairman seeking his third term, also said the proposed new building at New Lebanon is likely bigger than that neighborhood needs.

“We’re building the building we need,” Bernstein argued. “This is the building we need regardless of the racial balance plan.”

All candidates said Greenwich should not consider redistricting in future racial balance plans.

The conversation then turned to class size, a topic important to the Hamilton Avenue School, where smaller class sizes are mandated for students in kindergarten and first grade. Candidates disagreed on whether class sizes should be the same across the district. While all agreed smaller classes are better, opinions on how Greenwich Public Schools should decide class size at each school varied.

“I don’t believe in special rules for some schools,” said Sherr. “I think Hamilton Avenue should have what it has. I think the rest of the district should have what Hamilton Avenue has.”

Auerbach agreed, “Educational equity means that we treat all students the same and all schools across the district the same.”

Bernstein took a different stance.

“Students need differentiation,” he said, suggesting that student need should be considered when planning class sizes. “They’re not all the same. They’re not all homogenous.”

Olsson, a teacher in Westchester County and Greenwich High School graduate, suggested that student need and current facilities must be considered when allocating future resources.

“We have this vast disparity among the schools,” she said. “There is vast inequity among Greenwich Public Schools.”

An example of this inequity is Hamilton Avenue’s playing field, candidates pointed out from inside the school.

“For 10 years, Hamilton Avenue has had a hill,” said Auerbach. “Go to any other school and they have a field.”

Auerbach and Sherr described their $475,000 proposal to level the field and add a black-top playspace during the forum.

“We’ve been working on this for more than two weeks, we’ve been working on this for years,” Bernstein dismissed. “We’ve asked for the administration to go back and come out with a new plan; that is being done as part of the master plan.”

Sherr fired back.

“It’s great to talk about how you ran around and stomped your field, supported a million dollar proposal that will never see the light of day in the BET or the RTM - that’s not leadership,” he said. “My plan is different from what the original plan was and I am pushing it forward and I am determined to get it for Hamilton Avenue School.”

Olsson challenged the Republicans to think beyond what is “fiscally responsible.”

“It’s unacceptable and it needs to be fixed,” she said. “We need to do what is right, not just what is fiscally responsible... every child deserves a good recreation area.”

Many individuals submitted questions about how to retain staff in Greenwich Public Schools.

Candidates expressed strong support for new Superintendent Jill Gildea. Many candidates repeated that school board members should “stay out of the weeds” and make high-level policy decisions.

From her previous experience on corporate boards, Stowe said she learned that hiring a leader you trust is crucial.

“I look forward to working with her, partnering with her and staying out of her way,” said Stowe. “Let’s keep her. Let’s have some consistency. We’ll then keep the principals and it will trickle down.”

Sherr suggested that Gildea should have more power to hire the principals of her choice, by removing stakeholder groups of teachers, administrators and PTA members who make hiring recommendations.

As they did Tuesday, candidates laid out their positions on charter change — the Democrats and Bernstein firmly against and Sherr and Auerbach strong supporters.

Questions were solicited by the Byram and Chickahominy Neighborhood Associations from the Glenville, Hamilton Avenue, New Lebanon, Julian Curtiss and Western Middle School PTAs, and some came from the audience.

Candidates answered all questions in 90 seconds, rotating who responded first, and then had 30 seconds for rebuttal. Candidates also gave two-minute closing statements.

“For voters to form an informed choice, to be able to vote intelligently, it is good to hear the candidates,” said Jara Burnett, co-vice president of Voter Services for the Greenwich League of Women Voters, which organized the debates. “Here the voters can hear the candidates thinking on their feet, not giving canned statements.”

This was the second debate for BOE hopefuls this week. Candidates faced off on Tuesday night at Greenwich High School answering questions about charter change, personalized learning, new school start times, racial balance, the Greenwich Public Schools budget and how to teach children equitably.